Macron threatens to criminalize opposition to Zionism in France

Will Morrow

With each passing day, it is more obvious that the French ruling establishment’s campaign against anti-Semitism is merely a smokescreen for a reactionary agenda, carried out in alliance with far-right forces, to expand police powers and suppress left-wing opposition among workers.

On Wednesday evening, French President Emmanuel Macron addressed the 34th annual dinner of the Representative Council of Jewish Institutions in Paris. Echoing positions of the far right, his speech cast anti-Semitism as being principally associated with Muslims and left-wing, anti-capitalist sentiment in the working class.

Macron announced that his government will change its definition of anti-Semitism—that is, racist hatred against Jews—to include opposition to Zionism, the right-wing nationalist political perspective of creating a separate Israeli state.

Anti-Semitic hate speech is a crime in France, and Macron’s redefinition threatens to criminalize all criticism of Israel’s policies, including its murderous attacks against defenseless Palestinian civilians and war threats against Iran. While Macron said the penal code would not be changed, he said the change in the definition will “reaffirm the practices of our law enforcement, judges and teachers.”

Also under the banner of combating “hate speech,” Macron said that in May he will introduce a new bill targeting internet freedom. It would improve the government’s ability to censor overseas websites, which, he said, “switching servers regularly, are very difficult to block today.”

Macron aggressively denounced online anonymity—i.e., the ability of individuals to use the internet without having their thoughts and statements monitored by the government. “The question of anonymity will obviously be raised,” he said. “Too often, it is the mask of cowards. And behind every pseudonym, there is a name, a face, an identity.”

These measures have nothing to do with combating anti-Semitism. The government is building up its surveillance and censorship powers in response to growing opposition to social inequality and austerity in the working class, which has found an initial expression in mass “yellow vest” protests organized via Facebook and other social media.

Macron stressed the importance of his government’s recently announced censorship collaboration with Facebook. Beginning this year, government officials are being placed at the heart of Facebook’s content censorship offices, with no public oversight of what statements they are removing from social media.

It is all the more absurd and politically obscene for Macron to cloak this program in the flag of fighting “anti-Semitism.” He has worked to rehabilitate French fascism, declaring last November that Philippe Pétain, the head of the Vichy collaborationist regime that organized the mass murder of Jews in France, was a “great soldier.”

The official campaign over “anti-Semitism” has escalated since last Saturday, when a protester, whom police subsequently declared was under surveillance for adhering to an extremist Islamic movement, confronted Alain Finkielkraut, a right-wing Zionist political commentator who is Jewish, using foul language and denouncing him as a Zionist.

The statement of a single individual is now being used to tar the entire “Yellow Vest” protest with the accusation of anti-Semitism, though these protests have been animated from the outset by left-wing opposition to social inequality. A central goal of this campaign is to counter broad sympathy for the demonstrations among workers and young people.

The most striking element of the official campaign is the manner in which, under the banner of combating anti-Semitism, an alliance is being formed with neo-fascistic parties that are the political descendants of the forces responsible for the mass murder of Jews in the Holocaust.

Macron spoke just one day after protests called by the Socialist Party (PS) against the alleged anti-Semitism of the “yellow vests,” joined by virtually the entire political establishment. They were attended not only by the PS and most of Macron’s ministers, The Republicans, the Communist Party of France, and Jean-Luc Mélenchon, leader of the bourgeois “left” Unsubmissive France. The PS also invited Marine Le Pen, the head of the neo-fascist National Rally (RN) who only two years ago declared that “France was not responsible” for the Vel d’Hiv round-up of Jews for deportation from Paris in 1942.

If Le Pen’s star is rising rapidly at present in the political establishment, it is because her party expresses most consistently the militarism, nationalism and repression with which the ruling elite intends to respond to domestic political opposition. She is focusing her propaganda at present on aggressively attacking Muslims. Declining to attend the PS protest on Tuesday, she charged that the major parties “either have done nothing against the spread of Islamist networks in popular neighborhoods, or encouraged them…”

Such filth now sets the tone for official politics. Macron’s speech on Wednesday repeatedly warned about the growth of “radical Islam” and called for stepped up policing of working-class neighborhoods.

“This ideology grows like gangrene in certain suburbs,” he said, calling for a “Republican conquest of these territories.” The official campaign over anti-Semitism is emerging ever more openly as a racist attack against Muslims justifying repression of working people.

Macron tried to hide that this campaign is an onslaught against left wing opposition, presenting it as an even-handed struggle against political extremes. “Note well the different forms that it [anti-Semitism] takes,” he said. “The hatred of the Jew is at the same time the hatred of the communist and the capitalist … Anti-Semitism in all its forms is nourished by the extremes.”

These statements are falsifications. Anti-Semitism is historically the ideology of fascism, which carried out murderous attacks on communists. But its violent nationalism is incompatible with any genuine left-wing politics, let alone socialist opposition to capitalism in the working class. It was and remains the province above all of the far right, which is now growing thanks to support inside the same political establishment that is denouncing the “yellow vests.”

This was confirmed by a recent report published by the German government, documenting the alarming growth of anti-Semitic attacks in Germany. Despite claims by the entire political establishment that anti-Semitism is predominately “imported” by immigrants, it found that the overwhelming majority of anti-Semitic attacks were carried out by extreme-right groups.

Macron’s equation of anti-Semitism with all “extremes” is aimed at declaring that the left, and all social opposition in the working class, is inherently anti-Semitic and so essentially criminal. Referring to anti-Semitism, he said that “in the times we are in, other forms [of hatred] are rising with it,” including hatred “against elected officials, against authority, against parliamentarism.”

House Education and Labor Committee: US schools are in shambles

J. Cooper 

On Tuesday, February 12, the House Education and Labor Committee held its first hearing of the new Congress, an event which highlighted the desperate conditions in schools across the US.

As Democrat Bobby Scott of Virginia gaveled the session into order, teachers were escalating their demands by other means—on the picket lines. Three thousand striking educators in Denver struck and were enthusiastically joined by thousands of high school students. Charter school teachers from Civitas schools in Chicago had just entered the second week of their strike for higher pay. And three days prior, educators in all 55 of West Virginia’s school districts had authorized a walkout against legislation designed to open the state to charter schools, vouchers and other privatization measures.

The hearing was called to generate discussion on recently-introduced legislation, the “Rebuild America’s Schools Act,” which, Scott said, would generate $100 billion for “physical and digital infrastructure at high-poverty schools.” As he spoke, slides of roach-infested shelves, leaking roofs, broken windows, peeling doors and black mold-covered walls flashed on the screen behind him.

Ignoring the obvious, Scott studiously avoided the word “strike,” rather saying that in Oklahoma, West Virginia, Arizona, Los Angeles “and many cities and states in between, voters are demanding greater support for public education.” Both Democrats and Republicans—determined to squash any movement of educators toward a national strike over wages, working conditions and deteriorating infrastructure—are scrambling to present some kind of minimal legislation to address the all-too-obvious disastrous state of American education.

The hearing titled, “Underpaid teachers and crumbling schools: How underfunding public education shortchanges America’s students,” lasted over three and a half hours and took testimony from four witnesses. President of the American Federation of Teachers Randi Weingarten declared that “our members are very, very grateful for the focus of this hearing and for legislation that will invest in school resources and infrastructure.” Also invited was Ben Scafidi, an economist and fellow with EdChoice—a national school choice advocacy group founded by right-wing economist Milton Friedman—who promoted the “free market” model to determine teacher salaries during the hearing, as well as Sharon Contreras, superintendent of Guilford County schools in Greensboro, North Carolina, and Anna King, membership vice president of the National Parent Teacher Association.

In his opening remarks, Rep. Scott referred to the latest “State of Our Schools” report, which, he said, demonstrates that school facilities are “underfunded by $46 billion every year,” but what he omitted was that the same report indicates that $145 billion is needed every year to modernize and maintain the US’s public school facilities. These extraordinary sums expose the staggering inadequacy of his Rebuild America’s Schools Act, which would barely cover one year’s maintenance and construction.

He called for a “bipartisan effort” to press for resources dedicated to school infrastructure as part of President Trump’s promise of a “massive infrastructure package to rebuild America.” He noted in passing that America’s teachers earn on average 30 percent less than other college graduates with equivalent degrees and experience.

Weingarten outlined a few of the indices of systemic underfunding of education including the closure of two elementary schools in Philadelphia due to major mold growth; one-third of Detroit school buildings found to be in “unsatisfactory” or “poor” condition; school closings in Baltimore last winter as indoor temperatures plunged to the 30s and 40s; and textbooks so outdated they showed George W. Bush as the president—widely shared on social media during the strike last spring in Oklahoma. She also mentioned the American Society of Civil Engineers’ 2017 report card giving school facilities across the country a D+.

She did not include in her testimony the fact that, as president of the AFT for decades, she has consistently sabotaged any independent or coordinated strike action by teachers to oppose these abysmal conditions, playing an outright strikebreaking role in each and every part of the country. This included her heavy-handed shut-down of the “sickouts” among Detroit teachers in 2016 which demanded action precisely on the above issues. Of course, Weingarten would not need to reiterate to the assembled politicians such facts, because she was called to testify precisely because the AFT, together with the National Education Association, have openly colluded with Democratic and Republican administrations alike in privatizing education and imposing growing austerity on schools.

In the wake of this long record of starving public education, the burden of most school infrastructure maintenance and capital construction now falls on the local communities, primarily through property tax assessments. The federal government covers less than 10 percent of infrastructure maintenance and operation costs, zero dollars for improvements, and totally inadequate resources for instruction.

In fact, the combined federal contribution to education is only 8 percent, leaving the lion’s share of costs coming from state and local revenues—sales, income and property taxes—all of which have declined precipitously since the 2008 recession. To date, 29 states still have not restored education spending to pre-recession levels. Teacher salaries nationwide are still below those of 2007. As many teachers have pointed out, even with an 11 percent pay increase, that would put them just 1 percent above where they were before the 2008 crash.

The Democrats and Weingarten several times referred to Title I legislation that originated in 1965 as a response to the civil rights movement, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) which began in 1975. Appallingly, these federal programs have never been fully funded; in the US spending authorization and actual appropriation of dollars are two distinct congressional functions. In fact, the federal government has never contributed more than 16 percent of authorized funds to the nation’s schools. Federal aid for disabled students was cut by 12 percent under the Obama administration, while Trump’s 2018 budget called for even greater cuts. The program is essentially on rations, with special education in crisis throughout the country.

The Republicans used the testimony of Ben Scafidi to aggressively push the administration’s agenda for school privatization. Scafidi claimed that teacher pay could increase if money spent on “non-teaching” personnel was reduced. He was called on numerous times, primarily by Republican committee members, to reinforce their demand for increased charter schools, vouchers and “less government regulation.”

Scafidi claimed that test scores in Florida and Arizona showed “tremendous gains” because they are the two states “that permit the most choice to charter and private schools. … their eras of enhanced school choice.” He never mentioned, nor did any witness or politician of either party, that the increase in non-teaching personnel might in some way relate to the layoff of over 350,000 educators in 2008. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities noted in 2017 that there remains a shortfall of 135,000 teaching staff since that time.

The most recent strike in West Virginia explicitly opposed the introduction of charter schools, while the defense of public education and the demands to fund public education have been at the center of every walkout by educators over the past year. At this congressional hearing none of the congressmen and women, nor Randi Weingarten, challenged the growth of charter schools or the draining of resources from the public coffers to pay for charter schools or the expansion of vouchers in many states. The mantra of Weingarten has long been “school reform with us, not without us,” while the union is increasingly vying for the dues money of charter school teachers.

Newly-elected Democratic representative from Connecticut, Jahana Hayes, 2016 National Teacher of the Year (and the only teacher on the congressional committee), in her testy response to Scafidi, invoked the government response to the 2008 crash, “… We’re talking about this from an economic standpoint, in dollars and cents. That’s not what education looks like. This is not an economist problem. … If we are treating education and schools like corporations, then I would also say we need a two trillion dollar bailout. This is a profession. This is not mission work.”

However, none of the politicians at this hearing would countenance such a proposal, just as none would consider challenging the blank check given to the military or Homeland Security year after year. Teachers will continue to fight for the necessary funding of public education and the wages they deserve, but it will not come from the Democrats, Republicans or through the efforts of the unions. The resources necessary to expand and upgrade free, public and high-quality education must come through the expropriation of the wealth of the billionaires and corporations, whose wealth was created by the working class.

Another devastating fire kills at least 80 in Bangladesh capital

Sujeewa Amaranath

At least 80 people have been killed and another 50 injured by a fire that erupted in a four-storey building and raced through three other buildings on Wednesday night in the Chawkbazar area of Dhaka, the capital city of Bangladesh. It took more than 12 hours for the police and fire services to get the fire under control.

The media reported that most of the victims’ bodies were charred beyond recognition. A search for more bodies was discontinued after 14 hours. The death toll could rise because some of the injured are in a critical condition and are being treated in several hospitals, including the Dhaka Medical College Hospital.

Doubt surrounds the number of casualties. The New York Times reported that the firestorm claimed at least 110 lives. Samanta Lal Sen, the head of a burns’ unit in the Dhaka Medical College Hospital, told the Associated Press at least nine of the critically-injured people were being treated in his unit.

The cause of the fire is yet to be officially determined, but the resulting inferno was obviously fuelled by chemicals allowed to be stored in the area, despite repeated government promises of crackdowns on building code violations after similar disasters.

Shamsul Alam, an officer at the department of explosives, told Al Jazeera that an “initial investigation found that the fire started when a gas cylinder burst. Our team is still investigating. Nothing conclusive can be said now.”

Like many buildings in Chawkbazar, the ground floors were being used as warehouses and shops, while the upper floors contained residential apartments. According to media reports, highly combustible chemicals and plastic goods were stored in one warehouse on the ground floor and caught fire immediately. Eyewitnesses and the police said gas cylinder explosions in the residential apartments helped fuel the blaze.

The Chawkbazar district, which is said to be about 400 years old, has narrow streets and buildings erected very close to each other. When the fire erupted at about 11:00 p.m., many residents were sleeping. According to eyewitnesses, the sudden fire and explosions halted traffic, including vehicles and rickshaws, killing occupants and night shoppers.

Haji Abdul Kader told the AFP: “I heard a big bang. I turned back and saw the whole street in flames. Flames were everywhere.”

Mohammad Rakib, a restaurant manager, told the New York Times that he watched a rickshaw driver try to outrace the flames and then get burned alive. “So many people were trying to escape,” he said. “I was so terrified, I ran out of the restaurant and left behind all the money.”

The incident created a horrible and tragic scene with people anxiously looking for information about missing relatives and incinerated vehicles scattered across the street.

Some victims were having dinner at a nearby restaurant and others were said to be in a bridal party. A Dhaka Fire Service official said many of the victims were trapped inside the buildings. One woman was holding her small daughter in her arms when the rickshaw in which she was travelling caught on fire.

Officials told the media that fire-fighting trucks were unable to reach the site because the nearby roads were closed for a national holiday on Thursday and traffic filled the street.

In a typical face-saving ritual conducted after every such disaster, Bangladesh President Abdul Hamid and Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed expressed shock at the incident and sympathy for the families of those killed.

To deflect popular anger over the tragedy, the Ministry of Labour and Employment announced a meagre 100,000 taka ($US1,191) payment for the families of those killed and 50,000 taka for those injured.

Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal, who visited the area, announced the formation of a committee to investigate the fire and report within seven days. The Ministry of Industries and the Fire Service and Civil Defence (FSCD) also announced investigations.

Dhaka South City Corporation Mayor Sayeed Khokon declared that no more chemical warehouses would be allowed inside Dhaka. Such official responses, and empty promises of action, have been made repeatedly in the past.

Bangladeshi authorities moved to ban the storage of chemical goods in residential areas after a deadly fire in 2010, but little has changed. That fire, which occurred in Nimtoli district and killed 124 people, was also made worse by the presence of an illegal warehouse.

As the BBC reported: “After that incident, a committee suggested the removal of all chemical warehouses from residential areas, but critics say no significant steps have been taken in the years since.”

Even the government’s limited building zoning rules are often ignored because of lax enforcement or corruption. Wealthy business owners routinely pay off officials or the authorities who simply turn a blind eye in order to not interfere with profitable enterprises.

A taskforce comprised of FSCD and police officials was established after the 2010 fire but no warehouse was removed, an FSCD official told Al Jazeera.

Data collated by the Department of Explosives said that in Chawkbazar alone, 46 companies have licences to import and export combustible chemicals, while 70 other units have licences to use these chemicals to produce goods like perfumes. But an official from the department, who wished to remain anonymous, told Al Jazeera that beside these 116 companies, more than 2,000 illegal chemical warehouses were being run in the area.

Building fires and collapses have killed hundreds of people in Bangladesh in recent years. In 2012, more than 112 garment workers were burned to death when a fire burnt through the multi-floor Tazreen Fashion factory in the Ashulia district on Dhaka’s outskirts.

In 2013, the eight-storey Rana Plaza building, which contained five garment factories, collapsed. More than 1,200 people were killed, mainly garment workers, and thousands more were injured, in one of the world’s worst industrial disasters.

At that time, the World Socialist Web Site warned:

“In the wake of the tragedy, governments, the media, trade unions and various NGOs declare, in one way or another, that something must be done and promote the illusion that the global corporations and Bangladeshi government can be pressured to improve safety and living standards for garment workers. The reality is that the government will do nothing to jeopardise exports or profits. Amid the deepening breakdown of global capitalism, safety standards will worsen, not improve.”

Prime Minister Sheik Hasina’s Awami League-led government took office for the third time this January, boasting about high economic growth. The reality is that Bangladesh, like other impoverished countries, has been turned into a cheap labour platform for global corporations to exploit workers in sweatshop conditions. Hasina’s administration and the capitalist class are unable to address any of the population’s pressing social questions.

Just last month, the Awami League government backed large garment companies in sacking more than 7,000 workers after they returned to work, ending an eight-day struggle for wage increases amid police intimidation and threats of mass lock-outs.

In its efforts to attract international investment from other low-wage countries, Hasina’s government is desperately serving the interests of local big business, as well the global investors and retail giants that thrive on the ruthless exploitation of the country’s working class.

As the WSWS insisted in 2013: “These tragedies are crimes that are ultimately rooted in the profit system itself. Globalised production, which has the potential to provide everyone on the planet with a decent standard of living, is leading under capitalism to enormous profits for the wealthy few and the deepening immiseration of working people around the world.

“The only solution lies in a unified struggle of the international working class to abolish this outmoded and reactionary social order and establish a rationally planned world socialist economy to meet the pressing social needs of humanity as a whole.”

State murder backed by imperialism

Patrick Martin

In an action that demonstrates the barbarism of the military dictatorship in Cairo, the Egyptian authorities hanged nine young men February 20, after a sham trial using confessions extracted from the prisoners by torture.

Wednesday’s slaughter brought the number of political prisoners executed at the orders of President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi this month to 15: three were put to death February 7, allegedly for killing a judge’s son; three more were executed February 13, supposedly for killing a policeman in 2013; and then the nine hanged on Wednesday, part of a group of 28 men charged with the assassination of chief state prosecutor Hisham Barakat in 2015.

None of the 15 prisoners was linked to the supposed crimes by any evidence, except confessions obtained through brutal torture. The el-Sisi regime operates a “justice” system that makes a mockery of the word, with mass trials involving hundreds of defendants, charges that are entirely unsupported by evidence, and judges who issue rulings demanded by the dictator, regardless of the law or the facts.

According to a report on "Middle East Eye," several of the men executed February 20 had publicly disavowed their confessions in court hearings. The news service posted a link to a video of the defendants recanting their confessions and describing how they were tortured.

Mahmoud el-Ahmadi, aged 23, executed on Wednesday, told the court: “Here, in this court, there is a police officer who was in the prison with us and was torturing us. If you want me to point him out, I will do it. Give me a taser, and I can make anyone here in this court admit to a crime they didn’t commit. We were pumped with electricity. We were electrocuted enough to supply Egypt for 20 years.”

Abulqasim Youssef, another defendant executed Wednesday and a student at al-Azhar University, told the court he had been blindfolded, hung on the door upside down for seven consecutive hours, and electrocuted “in sensitive areas of my body.”

Amnesty International denounced the latest executions as a demonstration of the regime’s complete indifference to the right to life. The group issued a statement declaring, “Egyptian authorities must urgently halt this bloody execution spree which has seen them repeatedly putting people to death after grossly unfair trials in recent weeks. The international community must not stay silent over this surge in executions. Egypt’s allies must take a clear stand by publicly condemning the authorities’ use of the death penalty, the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.”

The “international community” to which this appeal is directed, however, consists of the governments of the major imperialist powers who are unanimous in their support for the Egyptian military regime, including its worst and bloodiest crimes.

Sisi’s bloody crackdown represents the Egyptian ruling class’s response to the Egyptian revolution of 2011, a mass revolutionary movement that overthrew the US-backed dictator Hosni Mubarak. In the absence of genuine socialist leadership, the Egyptian ruling elite has carried out a bloody purge of leading figures in the revolution, as well as opposition parties more broadly.

Since seizing power in a military coup in July 2013 that overthrew Mohamed Morsi, the elected president and leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, the military has slaughtered thousands on the streets of Cairo and other cities, jailed and tortured tens of thousands, and is now beginning to accelerate the machinery of execution for hundreds of prisoners it has sentenced to death after proceedings that were nothing more than kangaroo courts. Some 737 people now are under sentence of death, while 51 have exhausted all appeals.

These crimes have not stopped the embrace of el-Sisi by the United States and the European imperialist powers. On the contrary, the more his regime is steeped in blood, the more he is embraced and welcomed in Washington, Berlin, London and Paris.

In June 2015, the butcher of Cairo was hailed in Berlin by Chancellor Angela Merkel and the leaders of all the main bourgeois parties: the Social Democratic Party, the Greens, the Left Party, in addition to Merkel’s right-wing Christian Democratic Union/Christian Social Union.

In April 2017, el-Sisi was feted by Donald Trump at the White House, where he confirmed the continuation of massive US military aid, more than $1.3 billion a year. Last month, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo traveled to Cairo to deliver a fanatical anti-Iranian speech, while hailing the Egyptian dictatorship “as an example for all leaders and all peoples of the Middle East.”

Only 25 days ago, French President Emmanuel Macron went to Cairo, in the midst of the “yellow vest” protests at home, to hold discussions with a president who has shown how to drown a popular movement in blood. He promised to sell more weapons to the regime, including Rafale fighter jets and armored vehicles.

As the WSWS explained at the time, Macron’s visit to el-Sisi amounted to a thinly veiled threat to the mounting opposition to his government by French workers and youth. It was a declaration that the French ruling elite “is preparing a drastic intensification of repression of social protest amid a universal turn of the capitalist class around the world towards authoritarian forms of rule.”

Next weekend, the first-ever joint summit of the European Union and the Arab League will be held in Sharm el-Sheikh, with President el-Sisi hosting more than 20 heads of state, including British Prime Minister Theresa May, European Council President Donald Tusk and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker.

The fact that the Egyptian regime could proceed with nine executions only a few days before this summit testifies to el-Sisi’s confidence that he has the full backing of all those coming to Sharm el-Sheikh, both his fellow Arab despots and the “democratic” heads of state from the EU, for the savage repression of the Egyptian working class.

General el-Sisi orchestrated his own reelection in 2018 in a contest where most of his would-be opponents were either arrested or otherwise browbeaten to drop out of the contest. One army officer who dared to run against him, Sami Anan, was just sentenced to ten years in prison. But there has been no outcry about the “legitimacy” of his government, in contrast to the hue and cry over Venezuela’s President Nicholas Maduro, whose 2018 reelection appears a model of democratic procedure by comparison.

Two weeks ago, the Egyptian parliament, consisting of el-Sisi’s political stooges, began consideration of a constitutional amendment that will extend the presidential term from four years to six years and waive the two-term limit for el-Sisi. In effect, the military dictator will be allowed to stay in office for another 12 years past the end of his current (and supposedly final) term, which ends in 2022. This would enable el-Sisi to remain president until 2034, when he reaches the age of 80—two years short of the age at which his predecessor as military ruler, Hosni Mubarak, was overthrown in 2011.

Whatever the arrangements on paper, it is highly doubtful that el-Sisi will succeed in his goal of emulating Mubarak’s lengthy reign. More than 40 percent of the Egyptian population lives in dire poverty, forced to subsist on less than $2 a day. Economic growth is negligible, and the austerity measures demanded by the International Monetary Fund and World Bank as the price of further loans will only intensify the attacks on jobs and living standards.

Working class opposition to the regime is mounting. Even savage repression has failed to stop the outbreak of strikes in working class areas like the textile mill-towns of the Nile Delta. There are mass struggles of the working class throughout North Africa, most recently a general strike in Tunisia, and mass strikes by teachers and other workers in Morocco.

Under these conditions, the most vital issue is the building of a new revolutionary leadership in the Egyptian working class and throughout North Africa and the Middle East, based on a careful study of the lessons of the betrayal of the Egyptian Revolution of 2011 and the assimilation of the history of the struggle to build the international revolutionary party of the working class, carried forward today by the International Committee of the Fourth International.

Is Japan Getting Isolated?

Sandip Kumar Mishra


It has been reported that Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso wanted to meet US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo at the Munich Security Conference (15-17 February 2019), apparently to give him suggestions for the upcoming second US-North Korea summit meet (27-28 February 2019). However, US authorities informed that it would not be possible because of Pompeo’s busy schedule. Generally, such situations are not unusual; but this particular instance could also be seen as a realisation in Washington that Tokyo does not bring any positive agenda or suggestions on the North Korean nuclear issue and that therefore, it could be avoided.

In fact, in the changing equations in East Asia, Japan appears to be desperate to remain an important player but Tokyo’s inflexible over-reliance on an ‘assertive’ posture does not appear to be a suitable strategy to do so. While most regional countries have been trying to read unprecedented changes taking place in inter-state relations in the region and trying to adjust their policies, Japan appears to be fixed in its pursuit of becoming a ‘normal state’ in the context of its definite belief in China’s assertiveness and aggressively preparing for countermeasures as the only option. Where the US, China, South Korea and even North Korea have been shifting their positions and experimenting with multiple foreign policy options, Japan has been adamant in maintaining a single and fixed policy option.

Such a narrow approach has not only left Japan with a less significant role to play in the regional politics but has also strained its relations with nearly all regional countries such as China, North Korea, South Korea and Russia. There are also signs that even its closest ally—the US—has also been working with Japan only while implementing one of its options for the region, namely the Indo-Pacific strategy, to counterbalance China. In most of the US’s other options and goals for and in the region, Tokyo appears to be disconnected from Washington. The US appears to be dealing with China, South Korea and North Korea independently, and barely taking Tokyo’s positions and suggestions into account. Even in the context of Indo-Pacific strategy, there are two versions in the US policy—hard and soft—whereas Japan appears to have only the hard version of it. Thus, in the soft version of the Indo-Pacific strategy which emphasises not only on ‘free and independent’ but also ‘inclusive’ Indo-Pacific, Japan’s role appears to be less salient. Apart from the US, India and Australia too have been working simultaneously on both the versions but Japan is doing disservice to its own status by limiting its position to one version alone.

In dealing with the North Korean nuclear issue as well, it is rather obvious that Japan is a non-player compared to the tremendous diplomatic churning among Pyongyang, Seoul, Washington and Beijing. There have been three summit meets between the North and South Korean leaders, three summit meets between North Korean and Chinese leaders, and one summit meet between the US and North Korean leaders; and Japan appears to be isolated without any such exchanges. In fact, Japan’s Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, did meet US President, Donald Trump, before the latter’s first meeting with North Korea’s Supreme Leader, Kim Jong-un, in Singapore in June 2018. However, it was inconsequential as Japan’s only insistence was that the issue of North Korea’s abduction of Japanese citizens must also be raised during the talks. Japan has not been happy with current episode of engagement and concessions to North Korea by South Korea and the US, and is adamant on maintaining a tough posture. It is due to the same factor that Japan appears to be a non-player in the second US-North Korea summit meet in Hanoi as well.

In the past, Japan even tried to hold direct talks with the North Korean leader and there were few reports in mid-2018 that the leaders of both countries might meet; but North Korea does not appear to be interested in direct talks with Japan as it thinks that there is nothing positive that Japan could contribute. At present, Tokyo’s relations with Seoul are also described as being the ‘worst in five decades’ even though both countries share their important concern in the form of North Korea, and their closest ally in the form of the US. The comfort women issue, territorial disputes, historical contestations and even normal diplomatic skirmishes keep these two countries disillusioned from each other and there is apparently no common and coordinated position between both the countries on nearly any regional issue. The two countries have no coordination in their approaches regarding China, North Korea and even the Indo-Pacific strategy.

In the above context, it will be useful for Japan to simultaneously consider multiple options in pursuance of its foreign policy. In the changing regional politics, Tokyo needs to have multi-layered priorities to deal with this period of flux. Japanese capabilities to contribute constructive agendas and inputs in the changing regional politics are highly potent and Tokyo should certainly articulate such approaches. It is unfortunate both for Japan and the region that Tokyo is increasingly seen ‘less as a pivot to Asia and more as stumble’ and a course-correction is indeed required.

In the Wake of the Pulwama Massacre: What India Should Not Do

Manpreet Sethi


For India, 14 February, a day that should have ended with rosy pictures of a romantic sunset ended with bloody images of death and gore. Even before New Delhi could point a finger towards Pakistan, a neighbour that has long sustained a policy of cross-border terrorism, Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM), an outfit well known to operate from Pakistani territory with the help of its military, owned up to the attack on the CRPF convoy that killed 44 Indian paramilitary forces personnel. In the wake of this massacre, analysts across TV channels, South Asia watchers across Twitter and other social media platforms, and political leaders in front of every camera have been garrulous in their advice on what India should now do in response. Opinions have been voiced non-stop on how New Delhi should respond, the kind of action that must be taken to teach Pakistan a lesson and to avenge the death of the Indian martyrs.

This column is not about what India should do in the wake of the Pulwama tragedy. It is about what India should not do. The response from India is best left to the judgement of the government of the day since it has all the intelligence inputs, resources and the complete picture on the possible effectiveness and desirability of actions. However, there are at least four things the country must refrain from doing, and thus contribute to minimising more such instances.

One, India must not be deterred from action, of whatever kind it deems fit. Diplomatic and economic measures have already been taken. A consideration of a military response should not be ruled out either only for the fear that it could automatically lead to nuclear escalation as Pakistan would have us believe. It is Pakistan’s nuclear strategy to proclaim a low threshold for the use of its nuclear weapons, including low yield weapons in the battlefield. However, this should not deter India from a military action, if it so decides to undertake one. This posturing of a low nuclear threshold is not easy to translate into action without taking the country down the path of suicide. Rawalpindi is well aware of this. Therefore, use of conventional war-fighting potential remains an option, provided India is ready to pay the price for what even such an action would entail. That is an assessment the political and military leadership must make based on available inputs on level of military preparedness, objectives to be achieved, distractions from economic growth trajectory to be tolerated, and pressures of international climate to be borne. Fortunately for India, the mood of the international community on continued acts of terrorism from Pakistan is more favourable today than ever before. Nevertheless, military action always carries a risk of further escalation and all dimensions must be thought through—away from the cacophony of noisy constituencies of all kinds.

Two, India must not shout from rooftops on the military actions that could be taken in response to the terrorist strike. The choice of the military instrument must be left to the professionals and they must be allowed to use surprise to their advantage. This is not the time to have TV discussions on the use of specific forces and expositions on the limitations of our capabilities. Such debates are best left to times of peace. In moments of crisis such as this, if military action is to be taken, it should happen quietly, with precision, and with complete preparation. Not in anger, and certainly not to satisfy rabble rousers.

Three, India must not engage in vilification of Kashmiris. India prides itself in the unity of its diversity. However, this diversity also makes it a fragile nation and it is the duty of every citizen to strengthen the fabric of the country. India has paid a heavy price in the past when communities have been branded and punished for the acts of a few individuals. Such tendencies should be especially eschewed at this moment since breaking open such fissures is precisely the agenda of the perpetrators of terrorism. They would rejoice if the killings that they carried out snowballed beyond the immediate deaths. Therefore, India must not take actions that in any way add to creating more troubled waters that make it easy for the adversary to fish in them. It is natural that the enemy would be constantly on the lookout for vulnerabilities to exploit. It is for India to deny them such opportunities by addressing such gaps.

Four, India must not expect that it is through military action alone that the problem of terrorism can be permanently resolved. The use of terrorists—from home or outside—is a low cost option for Pakistan. Till such time as the military of that state believes that its own stature can be secure only by playing up Pakistan’s insecurity vis-à-vis India, it is unlikely to give up terrorism. Pulwama was not the last of the tragedies that India will be made to suffer. However, every time India is attacked, the response should be to mete out punishment of the kind that slowly chips away at the credibility of Pakistan military in the eyes of its own populace.

A military retaliation from India may suffice to satisfy a sense of revenge, but it cannot be expected to change Pakistan’s well-entrenched strategy of use of terrorism. For that to happen, a multi-pronged, long-term effort across politico-military-economic-diplomatic fronts—overt and covert, public and secret, with carrots and sticks, individually and with others—will have to be crafted with intelligence and executed with patience. India must not defer this process nor waver in its implementation since it is likely to be a long haul.

World Food Program (WFP)/Cargill Innovation Challenge for Zero Hunger 2019

Application Deadline: 28th February 2019 (23.59 CET).

Eligible Countries: All

To Be Taken At (Country): The Accelerator is based in Munich, Germany.

About the Award: The Global Innovation Challenge for Zero Hunger is looking for proposals that could transform the lives of smallholder farmers and small-scale livestock producers, reach a step change in food systems or increase the effectiveness of emergency response. From mobile applications to artificial intelligence, post-harvest loss prevention and new cultivation techniques, the challenge is seeking low- and high-tech solutions, business model innovations and more.
Selected teams will participate in a joint bootcamp at the WFP Innovation Accelerator from 13 to 17 May 2019 in Munich, Germany, where they will tackle field-level challenges and refine project plans with the hands-on support of industry experts and partners including Cargill leaders. Teams will also get a chance to receive up to US$100,000 in equity-free funding and access to a global network to test the solution’s impact and scalability in the field.
Cargill has committed US$550,000 in support of the WFP Innovation Accelerator, which is specifically designed to identify, nurture and scale bold solutions to achieve zero hunger.

Type: Entrepreneurship

Eligibility: The WFP Innovation Accelerator seeks high-potential solutions that tackle some of the biggest challenges in both humanitarian and development aid.
Teams applying to the challenge must:

1. be a registered company, with a for-profit or not-for-profit designation,
2. have a minimum viable product, and
3. show initial evidence of their solution, such as results of user research or initial tests of their prototypes.

Value of Award: 

• Up to USD 100,000 in sprint funding
• Network & Mentorship
• Access to WFP Operations

Duration of Program: 3 – 6 months

How to Apply: Apply to the WFP Innovation Accelerator

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

UNESCO/People’s Republic of China (The Great Wall) Co-Sponsored Fellowship 2019/2020 for Students from Developing Countries

Application Deadline: 15th March 2019

Offered annually? Yes


To be taken at (country): People’s Republic of China

About Scholarship: The Government of the People’s Republic of China has placed at the disposal of UNESCO for the academic year 2018-2019 seventy-five (75) fellowships for advanced studies at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. These fellowships are for the benefit of developing Member States in Africa, Asia–Pacific, Latin America, Europe and North America and Arab region.

Tenable at a selected number of Chinese universities, these fellowships are intended for scholars who plan to pursue advanced studies or undertake individual research with periodic guidance from the assigned supervisor in China for a duration of one year. Selected candidates will undertake their studies in the host universities as visiting scholars. Most of the study programmes will be conducted in English. Selected candidates will undertake their studies in the host universities as visiting scholars. In exceptional cases, candidates may be required to study Chinese language before taking up research or studying in their fields of interest.

Twenty-five (25) of the 75 fellowships are especially intended for candidatures from the Teacher Training Institutions supported by UNESCO-CFIT Project in the 10 African countries to pursue an Advanced Training Programme for Education Administrators and Teacher Educators at East China Normal University.

Field of Study: Any applicant can choose one academic program and three institutions as their preferences from the Chinese HEIs designated by MOE. Fellowships are for advanced studies at Undergraduate and postgraduate levels.

Type: Undergraduate, Postgraduate, Fellowship.

Eligibility: 

• • Applicants applying for General Scholar programs must not be older than the age of forty-five (45) and have completed at least two years of undergraduate study; and those who applying for Senior Scholar programmes must be a master’s degree holder or an associate professor (or above) and not older than the age of fifty (50).

• • English proficiency is required.
  • Be in good health, both mentally and physically.

Number of Awards: 75

Value of Scholarship: The Program provides a full scholarship which covers tuition waiver, accommodation, stipend, and comprehensive medical insurance.

Duration of Scholarship: 1 year

Eligible Countries:

AFRICA – 46 Member States: Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, Swaziland, Togo, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe

ASIA AND THE PACIFIC – 38 Member States: Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, Cook Islands, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nauru, Nepal, Niue, Palau, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Viet Nam

ARAB STATES – 13 Member States: Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Palestine, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, Yemen

LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBEAN – 26 Member States: Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, Venezuela

EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA – 12 Member States: Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Republic of Moldova, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Poland, Serbia, Ukraine

How to Apply: All applications should be endorsed by the relevant Government body (the National Commission or Permanent Delegation) and must be made in English with the following attachments listed in the Program Webpage (see Link below).
In order to be successful, You are advised to follow the steps (listed in the link below) involved in applying.


Visit Program Webpage for details

UK Weather and Climate Information SERvices for Africa (WISER) HIGHWAY Research and Fellowship 2019

Application Deadline: 5th March 2019 at 12:00 noon (GMT)

Eligible Countries: Select African countries based or operating in the Lake Victoria Basin (e.g. Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Rwanda)


About the Award:To develop academic and research capability in region, facilitating the increase in uptake and use of weather warnings across target communities and users by making them more relevant and usable, with local knowledge and terminology. 

One of the challenges of introducing decision-making weather information to communities is its accessibility and ‘local acceptability’ to vulnerable people (end-users). Indigenous Knowledge (IK) has developed over many years, has its own vocabulary for terms, and is a fully understood and accepted for decision support by the local communities. The introduction of meteorology as an alternative source of decision-making information is a challenge as it is an unknown quantity and the language is often very technical in nature.  
This activity should test the effectiveness of incorporating IK and its vocabulary into the processes of distributing weather information and warnings, in collaboration with African academics and researchers. 
This activity will take place alongside pilots on Lake Victoria (in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda) testing the delivery of a regional, co-produced Impact-Based Early Warning System for key weather hazards to lake users and communities.  Where suitable processes and methodologies are identified, it will develop the guidance and capacity for these to be delivered across the Lake Victoria region.

Type: Research, Fellowship

Eligibility: WISER, and the HIGHWAY project favour activities that are led by, or have very strong participation from, organisations and individuals either based or operating in the project regions, in this case the Lake Victoria Basin (e.g. Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Rwanda), and this will be reflected in the assessment of bids.
On this basis, we would expect any consortium undertaking this research programme to include:

• Established researchers and social scientists (from universities within and outside the region) forming a multi-disciplinary team with experience in (some or all of) use of weather information, integration of local knowledge (IK), communicating risk and working in communities;
• Early-career academics (undergraduate to post-graduate) working in weather, climate or social science. Specific information should be given in the responses as to how it will support African early-career academics, and how many;
• NMHS staff to support access to key user groups, such as extension workers or Service Development Team leads, and;  Representatives or members of key user groups and communities.

Number of Awards: Not specified

How to Apply: 

• It is important to go through all application requirements on the Programme Webpage see link below) before applying

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

AFRINIC Fellowship Programme (Fully-funded to attend AFRINIC-30 meeting in Kampala, Uganda) 2019

Application Deadline: 15th March 2019 00:00 UTC.

Eligible Countries: African countries


To be taken at (country): Kampala, Uganda

About the Award: The AFRINIC Fellowship Programme provides opportunities for individuals from African countries who have an interest in Internet operations and governance to participate in AFRINIC-30.
The fellowship provides basic financial assistance to applicants who fulfill the eligibility criteria and who are subsequently selected by the Fellowship Committee. Successful fellows will receive an award to cover travel and living expenses associated with attending the Program.
The selected fellow is expected to actively contribute to Internet Number Resource Management awareness in the AFRINIC service region prior, during and after the meeting. He/She is also expected to provide reports on how this fellowship has benefited his/her organisation/country.

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility and Selection: To qualify for the fellowship, you:

• Must be a resident of an African nation
• Don’t need to be an AFRINIC member
• Should have a technical (IT, Computer Science) background
• Must not have not benefited from previous AFRINIC fellowships
• Must be willing to report on how this fellowship has benefited you/your organisation/country within an agreed time frame

Upon selection, AFRINIC will notify the selected fellows directly and allow them seven (7) days to accept or reject the offer.
A public announcement of the fellowship awardees will be made after the acceptance by the selected candidates.

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Fellowship: The fellowship includes:

• Full Assistance with round-trip airfare to the meeting venue
• Hotel accommodation for the duration of the AFRINIC Plenary sessions, from the day before the beginning of the Plenary to the last day of the event.

Duration of Fellowship: 15 June to 21 June 2019.

How to Apply: If you think you meet the criteria above, apply below.


Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

Zukunftskolleg’s AAA Fellowships 2019 for Early-career Researchers from Developing Countries

Application Deadlines: 31st March 2019 and 30th April 2019

Eligible Countries: AAA countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America. 


To be taken at (country): Germany

About the Award:  The AAA Fellowships are offered to researchers related to one of the thirteen departments of the University of Konstanz. 
You can use this time to extend your research networks and to get to know the re-search environment at the University of Konstanz, without losing your ties to your home uni-versity. As these fellowships can build a first bridge to the German and European academic system, we also encourage doctoral students in their last year to apply. As a AAA Fellow, you will have a Zukunftskolleg Fellow as a partner who will help you integrate into your re-spective department and will support you during your research.
Funding follows DAAD rules and will include a stipend of 1.200€/ month and a contribution to travelling to Konstanz and back. The Zukunftskolleg will not offer employment contracts for AAA fellows. You may negotiate a contribution to health insurance and visa costs with the Central Office after the application was granted by the Executive Committee.

Type: Research, Fellowship

Eligibility:

• You are from an AAA country.
• You hold a doctorate or equivalent professional qualification OR are a doctoral student in your last year. Please provide either the certificate or a letter from your supervisor com- menting on the progress of your doctoral thesis.
• You do not hold a permanent academic position or a professorship, nor do you have a Habilitation or equivalent (Venia legendi).
• Your research project should tie in with one of the disciplines represented at the University of Konstanz.
• You should identify a researcher at the University of Konstanz with whom you intend to collaborate. Preference will be given to applicants who plan to team up with one of our current Zukunftskolleg Fellows.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award:

• Status as associated Fellow at the Zukunftskolleg;
• The opportunity to present your research work to an interdisciplinary community at the Zukunftskolleg’s weekly Jour Fixe;
• Interaction with a lively international community of peers and support with contacting other researchers in your area of research;
• Access to events organized by the Zukunftskolleg;
• Access to library resources;
• Access to IT services;
• Access to research support services (via Research Support, Academic Staff Development);
• Access to soft skill and cultural awareness courses (via Welcome Center, Academic Staff Development and external cooperation partners).

Obligations for visiting researchers

• You will live in Konstanz or nearby throughout the AAA Fellowship (the Welcome Centre of the University of Konstanz will gladly provide support with all organisational aspects of relocating to Konstanz);
• You will actively contribute to the interdisciplinary dialogue at the Zukunftskolleg during the weekly Jour Fixe meetings (during semester);
• You will interact with fellows and researchers in relevant departments at the University of Konstanz;
• You will give a presentation in a seminar or a public lecture;
• You will acknowledge Zukunftskolleg support in any publications resulting from the stay;
• You will write a short report (1 page) on your activities and achievements (within 6 months of completing your AAA Fellowship).

Duration of Programme:  The AAA Fellowships have a duration of up to three (or six) months 

How to Apply: Please submit your application documents in English as a single PDF file to zukunftskolleg@uni-konstanz.de. Applications should include the following in the link below

• It is important to go through all application requirements on the Programme Webpage see link below) before applying

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Nigeria LNG Prize for Literature 2019 for Nigerian Writers

Application Deadline: 5th April, 2019

Eligible Countries: Nigeria


To be taken at (country): Nigeria

About the Award: Nigeria LNG Limited who run the prize have made a call out for this year’s entries of the prize and the category shall be in Drama. The competition is open to Nigerian writers irrespective of their place of residence and having being published after January 2014.
The Nigeria Prize for Literature is the richest prize in African literature worth US$100,000 to the winner. The prize which was founded in 2004 to honor literary erudition by Nigerian authors rotates among four genres fiction, poetry, drama and children’s literature, repeating the cycle every four years.

The Literary Criticism Award

• No book published before January 2015 will be accepted
• An author will enter only one published work. More manuscripts will not be accepted
• No book  previously submitted for this competition may be re-submitted at a later date even if major revisions have been made or a new edition has been published.
• the prize will be rewarded for no other reason than excellence

Selection: Winners will be announced in October and will be presented to the public on a later date.

Value of Contest: US$100,000

How to Apply: 

• Ten copies of the entries and if available, an e-copy together with evidence of Nigerian citizenship (photocopy of Nigerian passport or I.D card) may be submitted either by authors or publishers in accordance with the genres in competition.
• Books should be submitted to Nigeria LNG’s External Relations Division, promoters of the prize, by the stipulated deadline.
• Complete contact information, including full contact address, phone number(s), email(s), and other relevant contact information will accompany every submission.

Entries shall be sent to:
The Nigeria Prize for Literature,
External Relations Division,
Intels Aba Road Estate,
Km 16 Port-Harcourt-Aba Expressway,
P.M.B 5660 Port-Harcourt
Rivers state, Nigeria
or
The Nigeria Prize for Literature,
External Relations Division,
4th floor Heron House,
10 Dean Farrar Street,
London, SW1H 0DX
nigeriaprizeforliterature@nlng.com

Visit Contest Webpage for details